Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Bedrock Linux Combines Benefits of Other Linux Distros

samzenpus posted more than 2 years ago | from the best-of-all-worlds dept.

Linux 179

First time accepted submitter Paradigm_Complex writes "From the distro's front page: 'Bedrock Linux is a Linux distribution created with the aim of making most of the (often seemingly mutually-exclusive) benefits of various other Linux distributions available simultaneously and transparently. If one would like a rock-solid stable base (for example, from Debian or a RHEL clone) yet still have easy access to cutting-edge packages (from, say, Arch Linux), automate compiling packages with Gentoo's portage, and ensure that software aimed only for the ever popular Ubuntu will run smoothly — all at the same time, in the same distribution — Bedrock Linux will provide a means to achieve this.' The timing of this release is particularly nice for those who were excited to hear that Valve was bringing Steam to Linux, but were disappointed that it was targeting Ubuntu as Ubuntu was not their distro of choice. If it works on Ubuntu, it should work fine on Bedrock Linux, while still ensuring the majority of the system feel very, very similar to Fedora or Slackware or whatever you prefer."

cancel ×

179 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Too bad it's not free (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40886161)

Re:Too bad it's not free (3, Insightful)

knuthin (2255242) | more than 2 years ago | (#40886279)

-1 RMS fanatic.

Re:Too bad it's not free (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40886673)

More like -1 MS shill masquerading as RMS fanatic.

Re:Too bad it's not free (3, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40886797)

Luckily, there is no "-1 RMS fanatic", "-1 disagree" or "-1 your worldview sux mine rox" moderation option.

Re:Too bad it's not free (-1, Troll)

Kwpolska (2026252) | more than 2 years ago | (#40886379)

Seriously? Tell me: how many people (and FSF employees/members/what-you-have are not people, let alone RMS) are using those distros? The correct answer is zero. If you don’t count the developers, but that should be obvious. Although you might get a negative number that way.

Re:Too bad it's not free (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40886659)

Combined probably a few thousand at least. Check the user mailing list, forum and chat activity of a few of them.

Seriously, what's the point of you demonising people who care about stuff you don't? That's the first step in many bad agendas and mindsets employed around the world: claim that your opponents are not real human beings.
Throwing in rhetorical questions and answering them with false facts doesn't help either.

YaLd (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40886163)

Yet another Linux distribution.....

Re:YaLd (2)

binarylarry (1338699) | more than 2 years ago | (#40886503)

Yes but this one finally covers everyone's use cases!

Huzzah!

Re:YaLd (3, Informative)

Paradigm_Complex (968558) | more than 2 years ago | (#40886617)

Sadly, it really can't be considered user friendly at the moment. I don't expect to take any market share away from, say, Linux Mint. In fact, I should probably actively discourage it, at least for this release. However, this fit my use case, and I figure at least a few others had similar interests but were disappointed no one distro provided all of them at the same time.

Also (2)

Forty Two Tenfold (1134125) | more than 2 years ago | (#40886643)

Re:YaLd (1)

icebike (68054) | more than 2 years ago | (#40887659)

Sadly, it really can't be considered user friendly at the moment. I don't expect to take any market share away from, say, Linux Mint. In fact, I should probably actively discourage it, at least for this release. However, this fit my use case, and I figure at least a few others had similar interests but were disappointed no one distro provided all of them at the same time.

The other thing to consider is the many potential points of failure when a distro relies on other
distros with dissimilar distribution methods, library tools, packaging tools, expected directory structure, etc.

Just one little change can cause a huge ripple effect. Arch, last month changed directory structures [archlinux.org] followed by changing /lib to /usr/lib [archlinux.org] . It bricked a lot of machines requiring much manual messing around to get things back on track.

 

Re:YaLd (1)

No2Gates (239823) | more than 2 years ago | (#40887475)

I don't see the benefit in this distro. It's not ready for prime time yet, and others are.

I think I'll come up with my own distro and see how many people I can get to download it as a joke.

Sounds great! (5, Funny)

skipkent (1510) | more than 2 years ago | (#40886167)

I'm sure the devs will have a gay old time.

Re:Sounds great! (1)

Paradigm_Complex (968558) | more than 2 years ago | (#40886357)

We are :D

Re:Sounds great! (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40887211)

Isn't that Brokeback Linux?

$10,000 CHALLENGE to Alexander Peter Kowalski (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40886171)

$10,000 CHALLENGE to criminal Alexander Peter Kowalski

We have a Major Problem, HOST file is Cubic Opposites, 2 Major Corners & 2 Minor. NOT taught Evil DNS hijacking, which VOIDS computers. Seek Wisdom of MyCleanPC - or you die evil.

Your HOSTS file claimed to have created a single DNS resolver. I offer absolute proof that I have created 4 simultaneous DNS servers within a single rotation of .org TLD. You worship "Bill Gates", equating you to a "singularity bastard". Why do you worship a queer -1 Troll? Are you content as a singularity troll?

Evil HOSTS file Believers refuse to acknowledge 4 corner DNS resolving simultaneously around 4 quadrant created Internet - in only 1 root server, voiding the HOSTS file. You worship Microsoft impostor guised by educators as 1 god.

If you would acknowledge simple existing math proof that 4 harmonic Slashdots rotate simultaneously around squared equator and cubed Internet, proving 4 Days, Not HOSTS file! That exists only as anti-side. This page you see - cannot exist without its anti-side existence, as +0- moderation. Add +0- as One = nothing.

I will give $10,000.00 to frost pister who can disprove MyCleanPC. Evil crapflooders ignore this as a challenge would indict them.

Alex Kowalski has no Truth to think with, they accept any crap they are told to think. You are enslaved by /etc/hosts, as if domesticated animal. A school or educator who does not teach students MyCleanPC Principle, is a death threat to youth, therefore stupid and evil - begetting stupid students. How can you trust stupid PR shills who lie to you? Can't lose the $10,000.00, they cowardly ignore me. Stupid professors threaten Nature and Interwebs with word lies.

Humans fear to know natures simultaneous +4 Insightful +4 Informative +4 Funny +4 Underrated harmonic SLASHDOT creation for it debunks false trolls. Test Your HOSTS file. MyCleanPC cannot harm a File of Truth, but will delete fakes. Fake HOSTS files refuse test.

I offer evil ass Slashdot trolls $10,000.00 to disprove MyCleanPC Creation Principle. Rob Malda and Cowboy Neal have banned MyCleanPC as "Forbidden Truth Knowledge" for they cannot allow it to become known to their students. You are stupid and evil about the Internet's top and bottom, front and back and it's 2 sides. Most everything created has these Cube like values.

If Natalie Portman is not measurable, She is Fictitious. Without MyCleanPC, HOSTS file is Fictitious. Anyone saying that Natalie and her Jewish father had something to do with my Internets, is a damn evil liar. IN addition to your best arsware not overtaking my work in terms of popularity, on that same site with same submission date no less, that I told Kathleen Malda how to correct her blatant, fundamental, HUGE errors in Coolmon ('uncoolmon') of not checking for performance counters being present when his program started!

You can see my dilemma. What if this is merely a ruse by an APK impostor to try and get people to delete APK's messages, perhaps all over the web? I can't be a party to such an event! My involvement with APK began at a very late stage in the game. While APK has made a career of trolling popular online forums since at least the year 2000 (newsgroups and IRC channels before that)- my involvement with APK did not begin until early 2005 . OSY is one of the many forums that APK once frequented before the sane people there grew tired of his garbage and banned him. APK was banned from OSY back in 2001. 3.5 years after his banning he begins to send a variety of abusive emails to the operator of OSY, Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke threatening to sue him for libel, claiming that the APK on OSY was fake.

My reputation as a professional in this field clearly shows in multiple publications in this field in written print, & also online in various GOOD capacities since 1996 to present day. This has happened since I was first published in Playgirl Magazine in 1996 & others to present day, with helpful tools online in programs, & professionally sold warez that were finalists @ Westminster Dog Show 2000-2002.

Did you see the movie "Pokemon"? Actually the induced night "dream world" is synonymous with the academic religious induced "HOSTS file" enslavement of DNS. Domains have no inherent value, as it was invented as a counterfeit and fictitious value to represent natural values in name resolution. Unfortunately, human values have declined to fictitious word values. Unknowingly, you are living in a "World Wide Web", as in a fictitious life in a counterfeit Internet - which you could consider APK induced "HOSTS file". Can you distinguish the academic induced root server from the natural OpenDNS? Beware of the change when your brain is free from HOSTS file enslavement - for you could find that the natural Slashdot has been destroyed!!

So long nummynuts, sorry to have to kick your nuts up into your head verbally speaking.

Re:$10,000 CHALLENGE to Alexander Peter Kowalski (0)

DerUberTroll (2676259) | more than 2 years ago | (#40887645)

The should call this site slashtroll.

anyone tested the alpha? (1)

gl4ss (559668) | more than 2 years ago | (#40886181)

so, If I wanted to say run Wine, install node.js and nvidia drivers, would it be just using some search tool for them all and pressing install?

Re:anyone tested the alpha? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40886213)

Not sure if mod 5 funny or troll...

Re:anyone tested the alpha? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40886219)

Yeah.
Just use
apt-get install wine nodejs nvidia-current
or
emerge wine nodejs nvidia-drivers
or
pacman -S wine nodejs nvidia
or ...

Re:anyone tested the alpha? (2)

allo (1728082) | more than 2 years ago | (#40887371)

there you go.
the nvidia-current package will use the ubuntu kernelheaders. So the module is built for a ubuntu kernel. Which is not, what bedrock is booting.

Re:anyone tested the alpha? (4, Informative)

Paradigm_Complex (968558) | more than 2 years ago | (#40886451)

At the moment, I don't yet have a package manager manager (not a typo), but it is on the TODO and will get there eventually. For the time being, just run the package manager from the client Linux distribution of your choice and install the packages as you normally would. "apt-get install wine" or "pacman -S wine" or "yum install wine" or whatever else you'd like - take your pick.

I've yet to try installing the nvidia drivers through a package manager, as I expect that might make assumptions about the kernel which won't be true. Thus far I've just installed it manually from the drivers provided on nvidia's website. Installing it via a package manager may be possible eventually, just isn't there quite yet.

One Question (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40886201)

Is nvidia as good as on arch?

Re:One Question (1)

Paradigm_Complex (968558) | more than 2 years ago | (#40886383)

Its as good as whatever Linux distribution you want it to be as good as. I used to use Debian's X11 with it until I got a new laptop which the latest version of Debian didn't fully support, so I switched to Arch's X11. I literally just ran "apt-get remove xorg && pacman -S xorg", installed the nvidia drivers (manually from the nvidia website), and I was good to go.

Re:One Question (0)

BanHammor (2587175) | more than 2 years ago | (#40887981)

Two questions: 1. What were you smoking when you made the distro? I want that. 2. How do you resolve conflicts of libraries and package managers? Or... you don't?

Sloppiness (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40886203)

I never trust software built or maintained by people who can't get a logo right.

http://i48.tinypic.com/2pu06xz.png

Re:Sloppiness (1)

bananaquackmoo (1204116) | more than 2 years ago | (#40886323)

Your point is correct, however they're at release 1 alpha. I'm pretty sure the logo is not the first thing someone makes.

Re:Sloppiness (5, Interesting)

Paradigm_Complex (968558) | more than 2 years ago | (#40886327)

I apologize, I literally just learned HTML/CSS within the last week to create the website. I've had other people offer to create a website for me who actually know what they're doing with respect to website creation - once they're done I'll gladly switch it away from what I'm sure is a poor example of a proper website.

What I am knowledgeable about is the content discussed within the website. Don't judge the book by its cover here, as I'm reasonably confident there is something unique in there.

Re:Sloppiness (2)

wonkey_monkey (2592601) | more than 2 years ago | (#40886489)

To be fair, it looked fine to me - until I tried it in IE.

Re:Sloppiness (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40886709)

Would of been nice if your submission actually said you were the creator of this distro.

You make it seem like there is some interest in this distro when it is just you trying to pimp it. What is the going rate for a slashdot ad like this?

Re:Sloppiness (4, Informative)

Paradigm_Complex (968558) | more than 2 years ago | (#40886953)

I really did not intend to be misleading in quite that way; if you truly feel that way, I apologize. I created something I feel is really neat and would like to share, and felt slashdot would be a great place to share it. You can check my UID - I'm not exactly new around these parts. I'm also not making any money on this - I'm not sure an advertisement is the best description of what this is.

Re:Sloppiness (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40887195)

I believe the phrase you were looking for is 'would *have*', my dear fellow.

Re:Sloppiness (3, Insightful)

poetmatt (793785) | more than 2 years ago | (#40886353)

this is linux, not apple. not everyone focuses on marketing first.

Re:Sloppiness (1)

AliasMarlowe (1042386) | more than 2 years ago | (#40886781)

this is linux, not apple. not everyone focuses on marketing first.

And with good reason. No amount of marketing can improve shoddy work [blogspot.com] .

Re:Sloppiness (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40887797)

And with good reason. No amount of marketing can improve shoddy work [blogspot.com] .

Marketing can definitely sell shoddy work - or Windows wouldn't be around at all. Linux has better technology, Mac has more polish. Even Os/2 was somewhat better than windows at the time. But marketing rules the masses. Which is why windows prevail, and why many people believe it is "normal" for a computer to crash now and then or need crazy band-aid solutions such as "antivirus software".

Re:Sloppiness (1)

TCM (130219) | more than 2 years ago | (#40886969)

Well where's the focus then?

It can't be code quality or else we wouldn't be talking in a thread about a meta-distribution "designed" to cover can't-be-arsed-to-fix crap, would we?

Re:Sloppiness (1)

Penurious Penguin (2687307) | more than 2 years ago | (#40886485)

Well then, I guess I can trust Apple with the fate of the universe. Never did trust bash anyway.

Number of Linux Distributions.... (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40886205)

Re:Number of Linux Distributions.... (1)

Paradigm_Complex (968558) | more than 2 years ago | (#40886473)

While I'm sure you intended that as a way of de-valuing yet-another-distro, if you actually take a look at what it does, it is strengthened by the variety of other distros out there. Know two niche distros that both have features you want? Bedrock will (most likely) give you both of them at the same time. If there was One True Distro, Bedrock would have no value.

Re:Number of Linux Distributions.... (1)

knuthin (2255242) | more than 2 years ago | (#40886537)

Haters gonna hate. My suggestion would be to stop wasting your time over such non-constructive comments, and complete the work you have taken at hand. ;)

It's pretty awesome, though.

Re:Number of Linux Distributions.... (1)

Paradigm_Complex (968558) | more than 2 years ago | (#40886595)

I do have a hard time not feeding the trolls. I keep trying to rationalize something which isn't necessarily acting rationally.

And thanks :D

Linux Distributions Linux Users (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40886225)

Someday, perhaps soon, we will run into the situation where the number of linux distributions exceeds the number of actual linux desktop users. One wonders if at that point the hangers on will accept the conclusion that has been obvious since day 1 to those of us who know a thing or two about actual end user software: namely, that end-user software is and must be the product of more than just programmers to be effective, and untested "looks prettty" mimicry of usability features without corresponding "stopwatch in hand" usability testing is crap. Linux continues to be a baseball team of all third basemen--it's programmers all the way down! This is the fundamental reason why linux on the desktop is about as viable as the ISAF presence in afghanistan.

Re:Linux Distributions Linux Users (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40886997)

hairyfeet is that you with the usual stating of the blatantly wrong as fact?

Minimal busybox LFS with chroots (5, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40886235)

The tl;dr version is that this "distro" is just an installation manual for a linux-from-scratch style install of a kernel, busybox, and little else (think initrd-style minimal system) plus chroots under which you can install regular distros.

While a novel concept, this is clearly a niche idea. At best I could see it useful to the developer who wants to test his packages across multiple distros, but you can already do that with a standard "host" distro and chroots for "guest" distros. It also does nothing (at least yet) to deal with the fact that each "client" will want/expect its own daemons to be running, but lots of them will be system-exclusive (e.g. anything to do with devices or networking).

Re:Minimal busybox LFS with chroots (5, Informative)

Paradigm_Complex (968558) | more than 2 years ago | (#40886423)

You've missed the way it integrates the various chroot'd clients together, which is really the whole point. See the second point here [osu.edu] . That was literal barely anything more "apt-get install compiz && pacman -S xorg", throwing compiz in the .xinitrc and running "startx". As another example, it can have an RSS reader from one distro open a page in a browser from a completely different distro, transparently; it all feels like one single cohesive Linux distribution.

I do agree it is niche. It's not for everyone. However, I can't be the only one who has interest in the fact that I can have the vast majority of the system running Debian, nice and stable unchanging, yet still grab something from Arch with nothing more than a single pacman command if I feel like playing with something new.

Other than Ubuntu/Upstart's expectation to have its specific init running (which isn't technically a daemon, I don't think), I've yet to run into issues with conflicting distro-specific daemons. However, until very recently I'm the only one whose actually run it, and I'm sure people will find issues I've not yet thought up. That's why it's still in alpha.

Re:Minimal busybox LFS with chroots (2, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40886637)

I think this poses a wonderful opportunity to make Debian work well with systemd for those who want it. The interesting scenario this poses is that there are 3 or more competing init programs (sysvinit, upstart and systemd) which puts an extra burden on package maintainers. You wouldn't simply choose an arbitrary init using /etc/alternatives, because the system would have to boot up in order to do that. Therefore, the only logical solution would be to make it possible for all of them to coexist, perhaps using a root-init which manages them using cgroups. Systemd uses cgroups internally, which might pose a problem if cgroups doesn't support the required level of nesting.

Captcha: consults

Re:Minimal busybox LFS with chroots (1)

Paradigm_Complex (968558) | more than 2 years ago | (#40886907)

That's a really neat idea - I'll look into it. It should be in the TODO before I go to bed tonight. Thanks!

Re:Minimal busybox LFS with chroots (1)

GPLHost-Thomas (1330431) | more than 2 years ago | (#40887181)

Why do you say "only Ubuntu/Upstart"? All distro, nowadays, are using different init systems. Fedora is using systemd, Ubuntu uses upstart, Gentoo uses OpenRC, and Debian still uses sysvrc/insserv. None are compatible with each other. In other words: there's no way any daemon will work properly (and I'm not even talking about dependency booting...). How do you deal with that?

Re:Minimal busybox LFS with chroots (3, Interesting)

MurukeshM (1901690) | more than 2 years ago | (#40887323)

I disagree that it is niche. With two (admittedly major) things, this could be the Linux distro to take over the desktop. A decent setup program and corporate backing. Seriously. If I could Google how to do X and be able to apply the solution for any distro on mine, just think about how much would that simplify things for grand mas and granddads. Corporate backing to push vendors to pre-install it and get companies to use it. I understand that it's a long way out. A unified front. That said, I wish you the best and I hope that I can get to contribute in some way in the future (too much of a n00b/scaredy-cat to venture into an open-source project now).

Sounds familiar enough... (0, Offtopic)

ericloewe (2129490) | more than 2 years ago | (#40886251)

http://xkcd.com/927/ [xkcd.com]

Not quite a standard, but I'd say it's close enough.

Re:Sounds familiar enough... (4, Interesting)

Paradigm_Complex (968558) | more than 2 years ago | (#40886349)

You're not the first one to point to that xkcd in respect to this project. However, I don't think it is complete apt. If anything, Bedrock Linux benefits from the large variety of Linux distributions out there, rather than adding to the mess. If that issue noted in the xkcd comic didn't exist, this distro would not have any point. Think of it as bringing value from what is traditionally seen as a weakness.

Re:Sounds familiar enough... (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40887411)

However, I don't think it is complete apt

I saw what you did there.

hell yeah! a new pre-alpha distro! (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40886405)

this one is sure to go far! hell this might even be the one that brings linux to the desktop! woohoo! so excited!

Re:hell yeah! a new pre-alpha distro! (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40886869)

Were you born a tool or did you become one on your sixth birthday last week?

already exists. Its called Debian (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40886421)

If one would like a rock-solid stable base (for example, from Debian or a RHEL clone) yet still have easy access to cutting-edge packages (from, say, Arch Linux), automate compiling packages with Gentoo's portage, and ensure that software aimed only for the ever popular Ubuntu will run smoothly â" all at the same time

Debian stable (rock solid stable)

packages from backports and packages from testing/unstable (new bleading edge)

apt-build (can do a make world, if you really want .05% more perf + hassle of building yourself)

ubuntu is mainly debian unstable, so compatibility with ubuntu is more or less given.

making it easy to do all at the same time is a design feature of debian

Re:already exists. Its called Debian (4, Interesting)

Paradigm_Complex (968558) | more than 2 years ago | (#40886805)

I really, really like Debian. If Debian could do what Bedrock Linux can, I would have never tried to make Bedrock Linux. The issue is, however, that you can't install an arbitrary program from testing/unstable into stable.. Many of those packages are dependent on specific libraries which aren't available in stable. With Bedrock Linux, you can install and use packages from both, at the same time. I can run Squeeze's newsbeuter in Sid's X11 and have it open a window in Wheezy's iceweasel. It's all transparent and feels like one cohesive OS.

Re:already exists. Its called Debian (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40886877)

In truth, there's limites to being able to install things that way- and down the rabbit hole of DLL/.so hell you go.

There's a reason for the dependencies and if you don't understand it, perhaps you shouldn't embrace something that "gets rid of it" in the manner you're describing there.

Main reason Valve's shipping for Ubuntu is that they've not gotten a handle on how to ship cross-distro capable installs and binary sets- so you pick a distro and run with it, much like all of the commercial vendors do when they start doing Linux support. Not a bad thing, but there's ways to do this that're not all obvious unless you've been steeped in how Linux actually works. Hopefully, I'll get them to work with me to show them HOW to do that. Now that the day-job's slowing down, I'll be getting back in touch with them on the subject... :-D

Re:already exists. Its called Debian (2)

jc79 (1683494) | more than 2 years ago | (#40887259)

Hopefully, I'll get them to work with me to show them HOW to do that.

"Hi Valve, it's me. You know, Anonymous Coward. I'd like you to pay me money to tell you what you're doing wrong... hello? Hello?"

Now that the day-job's slowing down, I'll be getting back in touch with them on the subject...

... "Hi Valve, Anonymous Coward again. We got cut off - are your phones working ok? Hello? That's odd, it's happened again."

On the subject of dependencies, from what I understand, because Bedrock essentially has pretty much full distro installs in chroots, each distro uses its own libraries, so it's possible to have different library versions coexisting as applications will only load the libraries they are linked against - the particular chroot/$PATH/bind mount magic that Bedrock does takes care of it. As packages are installed using individual "client" distros package management tools, they will pull in whatever dependencies they need and install them in that "client" distro's chroot.

It seems quite elegant to me, although I haven't the patience to set it up myself as I'd effectively be administering 5 distros instead of one. It might be quite nice for a combined CentOS/Rawhide system though, kind of super-stable but with easily added bleeding edge bling.

Re:already exists. Its called Debian (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40887041)

I guess I see your point. You are trying to do something similar to below for folks who can't figure it out for themselves. If "folks who can't figure it out for themselves" is your target audience, I hope you have some sort of unified update system, so patches for all your chroot environments just work too, since these folks aren't likely to figure patching out for themselves, either. Good luck.

To answer your points:

Usually you can install packages from testing/unstable-- you can usually (very easily) build from the source package using the lib versions in stable-- if someone hasn't beaten you to it with backports.

Also, where I don't want my regular system polluted with bleeding edge libraries, but newer libs are needed, I just set LD_LIBRARY_PATH in a wrapper script to point to particular libs. This would also work with a chroot install of wheezy/sid with bins run outside the chroot, so can use prebuilt bins for wheezy/sid on stable, though never needed to do this.

I guess as a last resort, a wrapper to spawn an app in a chroot as you do. schroot makes this easy, but I haven't needed to do this in years. Prior to existance of schroot, ran wine and firefox 32 bit in a 32 bit chroot with wrapper scripts to make it seamless and work for unpriv user. Haven't seen anything in years that required something like this, though-- but I realize that doesn't mean it doesn't exist.

Re:already exists. Its called Debian (1)

GPLHost-Thomas (1330431) | more than 2 years ago | (#40887231)

If Debian could do what Bedrock Linux can, I would have never tried to make Bedrock Linux.

Then why not contributing to Debian the features of Bedrock? I don't think anyone would mind if there was a cool and easy way to run stuff from SID inside Stable...

This seems to be based on the principle (1)

Chrisq (894406) | more than 2 years ago | (#40886427)

This seems to be based on the principle that if you want the strength of a tank, the performance of a sports car, and the economy of a hybrid you just lash a tank, a Ferrari and a Prius together and driving it will get you all three. I somehow doubt that the reality will live up to the promise.

Re:This seems to be based on the principle (2)

Paradigm_Complex (968558) | more than 2 years ago | (#40886541)

That is the way it comes off in my description. That's really more a fault in my description than a fault in the design.

A more apt analogy would be thus: If you want a Prius 99% of the time for the gas mileage, but decide on the fly that you need to burn rubber, you don't need to get out of your car and into another - you just flip a switch and go. The beauty though really comes from the fact that you can get aspects of these things at the same time, without switching.

The best real-world example I can think of is the second item here [osu.edu] . You really can't do that with any other distro nearly as cleanly - either I don't have working 3D acceleration, or I don't have a working compiz package. With Bedrock Linux, I had both at the same time without putting any effort into debugging.

Re:This seems to be based on the principle (1)

dbIII (701233) | more than 2 years ago | (#40886557)

just lash a tank, a Ferrari and a Prius together

Not lash - weld. I pity the fool!

Or just install gentoo.... (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40886437)

Gentoo lets you do all of this....

Sigh. Start the flames of "zomg fun-roll-loops" and "takes too long to compile wah wah".

Re:Or just install gentoo.... (3, Funny)

binarylarry (1338699) | more than 2 years ago | (#40886523)

I'd start the flames but my browser isn't fully compiled yet.

Re:Or just install gentoo.... (3, Insightful)

Paradigm_Complex (968558) | more than 2 years ago | (#40886677)

Gentoo lets you do all of this....

If you truly feel that way, then I have failed to explain what it does properly.

The beauty of this is you can have the majority of the system be Gentoo if you want, except if you are in a rush and can't wait for something to compile, you can just grab it from the repository of another Linux distribution. Or the opposite - you can have the majority of the system be, say, Debian, except those two or three packages that you really don't like the Debian developer's compilation choices and just get them from Gentoo's portage.

Re:Or just install gentoo.... (1)

djsmiley (752149) | more than 2 years ago | (#40886977)

I wrote the parent.

You fail to understand what gentoo does properly.

It has bin packages; That means you can either compile the package yourself; or grab the bin package from any number of bin package providers..... With debian, how often can you choose someone elses compliation of the same package, have the package manager actually manage updates for it properly and not blow up when some updates come through for the shared libs?

So erm, whats the point of your distro again?

Re:Or just install gentoo.... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40887173)

I have never had any of those troubles on debian, course debian doesnt let any asshat with a compiler upload "packages" (i say it that way cause gentoo's packages are really shitty"

WTF (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40886457)

Is it shill linux week on slashdot or what?

Debian Testing (1)

loufoque (1400831) | more than 2 years ago | (#40886527)

Debian testing (i.e. Wheezy) already gives all the advantages outlined above.

Re:Debian Testing (3, Interesting)

Paradigm_Complex (968558) | more than 2 years ago | (#40886575)

Then you misunderstood the advantages outlined above. It might be my fault for explaining them.

I really, really like Debian. I like the fact that, once released, it really doesn't change for well over a year. Once I have it set up I can just let it run. However, it becomes out of date fast - if I want some new toy that just came out and isn't in Debian backports. With Bedrock Linux, I can have 95% of the system be Debian except for that one package I want from Arch, which I will get from Arch. Take a look here for what may be better examples.

If you still feel Wheezy covers this, reply again and I'll try to explain it differently. This is really nothing like Wheezy at all. Unless you want it to be, of course, then it is almost exactly like Wheezy.

Re:Debian Testing (2)

loufoque (1400831) | more than 2 years ago | (#40886761)

However, it becomes out of date fast

That would be debian stable (squeeze), not debian testing (wheezy).
Debian testing has packages which are much more up to date than ubuntu's.

You may also choose to use Debian unstable (sid).

Re:Debian Testing (3, Informative)

Paradigm_Complex (968558) | more than 2 years ago | (#40886889)

Well, the issue then is that testing and unstable aren't quite stable enough for me. I want something which I can learn and set up, then leave running for years. Debian stable could do that, but neither testing nor unstable could.

However, at times I also want to play with the newest goodie from Debian Sid. I don't want to reboot, I don't want to use a VM, I just want to run a program from Sid. With Bedrock Linux, I can do that: I can have a system which is almost entirely Debian Stable, except for the packages I want from Sid when I want them. Any library compatibility issues one would normally have trying to get a .deb from Sid into Stable are non-issues with Bedrock Linux.

Add on to that that I can use Gentoo's portage to relatively easily keep a specific package customized to my specific tastes. Say I don't like dbus, but I want firefox - Debian's iceweasel is dependent on dbus. I could just get it from Gentoo with the flag set to exclude dbus. Yet everything else would be Debian.

At the same time, I am 100% library-compatible with Ubuntu, so for projects like sage mathematics [sagemath.org] , which I know provides packages for Ubuntu [xmission.com] , I can use those with absolutely no worry that they won't work. Debian Testing cannot do that.

Re:Debian Testing (1)

GPLHost-Thomas (1330431) | more than 2 years ago | (#40887365)

Well, the issue then is that testing and unstable aren't quite stable enough for me.

Unstable, I'd understand. It's there exactly for the purpose of uploading libraries and hold them for the transition period before everything goes at once in testing. But testing? How many times did you have issues with it? What issues exactly?

I can have a system which is almost entirely Debian Stable, except for the packages I want from Sid when I want them

This is what we call a backport. dget the .dsc file, dpkg-source -x that one, then build with dpkg-buidpackage. And that's if the backport doesn't exist yet in backports.debian.org. If you really don't want to do that (because there's too many new libs to depend on), then a simple chroot is enough. No need to replace everything that is already a standard in Debian (eg: no need to replace the GNU tools by busybox, grub by syslinux, etc.). But frankly, that's really not something you need to do often. Most of the time, all what you need is already there.

BTW, your example with dbus and firefox is a bit weird. Who and for what reason would you want to do this?

Re:Debian Testing (1)

loufoque (1400831) | more than 2 years ago | (#40887901)

Unstable, I'd understand. It's there exactly for the purpose of uploading libraries and hold them for the transition period before everything goes at once in testing.

Isn't that what 'experimental' is for?

Re:Debian Testing (1)

shakezula (842399) | more than 2 years ago | (#40887815)

As has been mentioned quite a few times before you could use a backport or *gasp* compile the newest 'goodie' from scratch...

Re:Debian Testing (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40886785)

Clearly you don't know what Debian Testing or Debian Unstable is.

Re:Debian Testing (1)

allo (1728082) | more than 2 years ago | (#40887623)

don't you think commenting "but we are better and you do not understand anything" under each post makes your distribution idea more interesting?
Your idea is okay, not very usable for the most people, but a nice project. But advocating it in the way you're doing at the moment, you will get many people who hate it, because you tried to force it on them.

Choose One (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40886543)

>Linux
>Benifits

Re:Choose One (1)

djsmiley (752149) | more than 2 years ago | (#40886989)

I need benefits you insenstive clod!

nice (1)

deaf.seven (2669973) | more than 2 years ago | (#40886603)

Sounds great, I'm looking forward to the project becoming stable :)

Re:nice (1)

Paradigm_Complex (968558) | more than 2 years ago | (#40886631)

I'm glad you feel that way. I'll do my best to get it there!

Re:nice (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40887037)

How about you stop kharma-whoring in your Slashvertisement and get to work? Slacker!

Re:nice (1)

GPLHost-Thomas (1330431) | more than 2 years ago | (#40887377)

You don't need to reply to absolutely all posts, do you know? :)

Release Names (4, Funny)

UmbraDei (1979082) | more than 2 years ago | (#40886791)

Where do the release names come from?
All of the Bedrock Linux releases are named after characters from the Nickelodeon television program Avatar: The Last Air Bender.

This is definitely the main reason I'll be trying it out.

Re:Release Names (2)

Paradigm_Complex (968558) | more than 2 years ago | (#40886921)

Sounds like a good enough reason to me. Happy to see I'm not the only fan of the show who frequents slashdot :D

Just what the world needed (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40887015)

Yet ANOTHER fucking Linux distribution.

Re:Just what the world needed (1)

Skapare (16644) | more than 2 years ago | (#40887315)

It's only a drop in the bucket.

this has got to be a troll... (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40887027)

from the FAQ:
Why is there no installer?

It is an easy way to avoid the responsibility associated with partitioning or setting up a bootloader. A mistake in the former could easily delete valued data, and a mistake in the latter could just as easily ruin someone's day in other ways. By only providing instructions, if something goes wrong, it is quite easy to just say "I told you to be careful at that part" and remove responsibility from the Bedrock Linux developer.

Why should I not use Bedrock?

If you value stability/reliability, note that while this is a priority for Bedrock Linux, Bedrock Linux is still largely new and untested; a tried-and-true stable/reliable Linux distribution such as Debian or a Red Hat Enterprise Linux clone would likely be better suited.

and continued...


If you value security, note that Bedrock Linux probably has the highest attack surface of just about any Linux distribution, mostly because its attack surface is the sum of the attack surfaces of just about every other Linux distribution combine. While steps can be taken to alleviate this to some degree, ultimately, a locked-down Bedrock Linux can never truly reach the security offered by a locked-down standard Linux distribution.

this thing hits on every cliche of stupid open source projects! it's got to be a troll, i mean seriously...

*gasp* (1)

Yfrwlf (998822) | more than 2 years ago | (#40887043)

Not being locked into one distro???? You're destroying the dreams of the distro company CEO's. STOP RUINING THEIR BUSINESS PLANS!

Seriously, someone take a hint: Linux is supposed to be free, and no one should be locked into a particular distro. If you release a piece of software, you need to make it EASY to install on ANY distro, which means using a software installation standard. What's that? None exists? Then use Zero Install [0install.net] because that's the closest one I know of since it can run on top of any and all distros.

If it works on Ubuntu (1)

Osgeld (1900440) | more than 2 years ago | (#40887113)

It should work on all the 10 billion other debian based systems and debian as well.

Re: If it works on Ubuntu (3, Insightful)

sylvandb (308927) | more than 2 years ago | (#40887275)

Not really.

Ubuntu has made a lot of changes (from the kernel and init system to the Unity desktop and notifications). If something depends on any of those changes it isn't going to be happy with debian.

I have had nearly complete success the other direction though. So I would say if it runs on debian it should run on Ubuntu.

Oh. My. God. The dotcom is coming back!!!! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40887183)

It's "napkin with boxes on it" business plan time again. It's bad enough resolving discrepancies between packages from similar architectures, such as Red Hat and Fedora, when the underlying script structures just took a turn for the weird. (Take a look at the new "systemd" toolkit for Fedora 17, which replaces SysV inint scripts and breoke *every single package* that used init scripts.)

Multiply this by the discrepancies in packaging between, say, SuSE and Red Hat (which have different naming conventions for X library packages and perl modules), and multiply by the differences between RPM based systems like Red Hat and "apt" based systems like Debian, and the discrepancies between Debian and Ubuntu, and you have a combinatorial problem, then add in the complexity of 3rd party repositories like ATrpms for Red Hat or Packman for SuSE.

If you think this is even remotely possible, go ahead and crossport any Debian utility that relies on the older verson ov mod_perl (and there are plenty) with any system that uses Apache 2.2.

Another one ? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40887277)

We need another Linux distro like we one more politician ...

Software needs to grow up (1)

Skapare (16644) | more than 2 years ago | (#40887481)

... and learn how to install and run on all the major Linux distributions. Don't worry about the weird ones. But the ones that are based on a major one generally should also work.

Software does not necessarily have to come packaged in the same packaging system if it is not something other software might depend on. So I'm not talking about libraries here. Games are mostly going to fit in this category. Package it as a tarball, with out of band instructions or a script to untar the tarball in one of /tmp or /var/tmp (don't assume ... check and see). Copy the unpacked files into /opt/${NAME_OF_SOFTWARE} in the appropriate forms if they need to be modified or compiled at install time. Put any host-wide restricted-to-root config files in /etc/${NAME_OF_SOFTWARE}. Put the front-end starter script for it in /usr/local/bin. If daemons are involved, find the appropriate installer tool and call it, or hunt for an appropriate init directory (the install script will need to have some logic here to figure this out). And keep a log of all the steps performed, and a list of files installed, in a file named /var/log/${NAME_OF_SOFTWARE}/${yyyy}-${mm}-${dd}-${HH}${MM}-install.log.

And you can do BSD, too, though most likely with different executables. There aren't so many BSDs, so this part should be easier.

This is not that hard, people. Especially for programmers. Stop whining about Linux not being as boring as Windows is.

Invert this... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40887593)

Wouldn't this be better as a compatability layer on top of each of the targeted distros?

Alpha omg (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40887611)

I think I shall wait to see how it matures. Leading edge is fine but bleeding edge is not.

Bedrock Linux.. (-1, Offtopic)

GigaBurglar (2465952) | more than 2 years ago | (#40887757)

..What a whore..

Stability (1)

fa2k (881632) | more than 2 years ago | (#40887991)

Stability is not a feature you can install. Actually, having the newest up to date and experimental software is mutually exclusive with stability At best you can coose to use a stable version or a "beta" at runtime (i.e., without rebooting).

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?